The internet thinks Facebook just killed the Oculus Rift

As announcements go, this one hit everybody way out of left field. From the halls of GTC to the echoing environs of Reddit, when Facebook excitedly announced that it had purchased Oculus VR — the manufacturers behind the much-desired Oculus Rift — the collective internet was dazzled with a brief moment of total WTF. A few hopefuls tentatively theorized that it might have been an early April Fool’s joke.

First, there’s this: If Mark Zuckerberg labored under the illusion that his company was trusted or seen, in any way, as having its finger on the future of gaming, those illusions should be shattered. Those of us who have been gaming since the 80286 was a hot ticket have generally watched the growth of Flash-based Facebook games with a mixture of skepticism and dismissal. Companies like Zynga may have gotten rich off Facebook engagement, but the kinds of games on Facebook are exactly what hardcore gamers and the Rift’s target audience don’t want.

Second, there’s the fact that many of us resent — deeply — having been turned into commoditized products. People may use Facebook, but that doesn’t automatically mean they like it. Zuckerberg has built a reputation for ignoring privacy, changing features on a whim, and relentlessly searching for more aspects of users’ lives that he can crunch into monetized kibble.

The Oculus Rift DK2 will sport low-persistence displays, which will reduce the nausea-inducing motion blur produced by fast-paced games

The Snowden leaks and blowback over the always-on Kinect 2.0 should have been a sign to Zuckerberg that his company’s intrusion into the living room via 3D headsets isn’t welcome. There is no way Facebook’s entry into this space would be taken as anything but a cynical attempt to grab more user data, because that’s the reputation Facebook has built for itself. Meanwhile, Zuck’s utterly tone-deaf monologue about buying Oculus Rift because it was the future of social networking couldn’t have sounded worse to people who bought into Rift because it was the future of gaming.

“Oculus has the chance to create the most social platform ever,” Zuckerberg said, “and change the way we work, play and communicate.”

Newsflash, Zucky. Nobody bought a Rift because they want to be part of your social network. Nobody. And so, when you decide to hype your purchase by talking about features that literally nobody wants or paid for, it’s not surprising that people get a little cranky about the whole thing. The solution to this is to reaffirm your fundamental commitment to the original mission the Oculus Rift set out to achieve, talk about your plans for getting that project off the ground, emphasize that no, you won’t be using the Rift to tie people to Facebook, push Facebook, integrate Facebook, or attempting, in any way, to make anyone use Facebook.

The broader context

Consumers are generally pretty wary of having some kind of always-on, corporately-controlled gadget in the living room.

I think the explosion of fury over Oculus is actually more interesting than just some angry nerds because it reveals how deep the distrust goes between the corporations that monetize data and their customer bases. We live in an age when research has proven that most “anonymous” data isn’t anonymous at all. We’re tracked when we step outside, we’re tracked online. Microsoft’s Kinect plans for the original Xbox One raised serious privacy issues in the wake of the Snowden revelations precisely because it made people ask if Microsoft was even in control of its own technology. When the NSA is willing to hack private data links between Google and Yahoo servers, there’s no guarantee that Facebook’s data will stay private, no matter what the company says.

Pushing John Carmack to step up and make some comments about the state of the Oculus Rift would help, because Carmack is a voice that hardcore gamers trust, but I don’t think anyone is going to trust this technology in Zuckerberg’s hands, no matter what he says. Facebook is a company with the motto “Move fast and break things.” It has a history of dictating changes to its users and customers. It doesn’t have a stellar reputation for feedback or strong user engagement, unless “We pretend to listen, then do it anyway” actually counts as a feedback strategy.

It may not be the wrong company to launch a peripheral like the Rift, but it sure as hell looks like it. If the company continues to make grand promises of social engagement as opposed to focusing on the game-centric strategy that the Oculus’ existing sponsors actually want, the result could be the fastest plunge from hero to unwanted garbage in product history.

Tagged In

I’m neither a facebook user nor a hard core gamer anymore, but I loved this rant/article. Cogent, passionate, and well expressed. Nicely done!

Barry Ferguson

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Kynn

I agree with you two

pelov lov

Part of the reason for the outcry is that a huge portion of Oculus’ followers and backers are the types of folks who purposely avoid companies like Facebook due to privacy concerns. These are people who use VPNs or run their own email servers; in short: true techies and enthusiasts with a legitimate concern for privacy. (True techies that feel more at home in an IT room than and the fashionable ones who dwell in coffee shops on Macbooks)

Hopefully Sony gets their project off the ground. An even better candidate would be Valve, but the work they’ve done was closely bound to Oculus. Either way, yea, Oculus VR looks DOA.

Tom

Valve do have their own VR gear, they just weren’t planning on releasing it (since they were working with Oculus, more or less using their gear for development).

Will be interesting to see if that changes and Valve release their own hardware. Please god, let it change.

eonvee375

+1, Go valve!,
ORift is dead to me i think… what a shame. Now even Sony’s VR doesnt seem such a bad idea now.

AdamWL

The Sony VR has the same features so its pretty much is an Oculus Rift made by Sony.

Tom

Is it Playstation only though, or will they provide PC compatibility, do you think?

Jai Guru

While I can’t deny it authoritatively, Sony has a really shit history with doing that sort of thing even when it was as simple as writing windows drivers. They are very much attempting to work in a closed hardware environment.

eonvee375

open source? PC? … maybe – so maybe ^^

castAR fan

all true ,alas some hard core techs are apparently still unaware of jeri’s (self created and technologically sound) true innovation for the long term.

she also said “Jeri Ellsworth: Minecraft would be awesome on castAR”

“Jeri Ellsworth: it shows that the industry is ready for AR/VR tech. Like or dislike the deal is a different topic.”

as it stands now, i think i agree

Timothy

God I hate BillBashams comment, but the truth hurts like a bastard. Gaming industry is failing, but thats hardly Facebooks fualt at all. What about EA games? They for sure are the reason. Also Microsoft and Xbox hording money, with all its features you pay for. That for surely takes the wallet of the gaming industry. Also Nintendo, they made awesome games but guess what we all grew up and they keep making games for only one age group. They don’t love adult gamers? am I to big?. I thought gaming in 2014 was going to be infinite, something like mine craft but way more detail. I thought I was going to role into a city with my tank and hit no invisible walls of death. Did I expect to much? was I dreaming? I love the game EVE online but it isnt all there. Eve has a lot going for it, but I don’t see my avatar and all it customizations with its 3rd person 1st person view getting into a war on a planet only to realize im about to be obliterated so I beam onto my ship and take off light speed into another galaxy. I dont see that, and I wanted it so bad.

Tom

It’s going to get better (I cling to that belief). Think of this is a bit of a shake-down for the industry. An explosive series of changes that will set the stage for the future. Our voices as consumers are finally being heard (nice example, MS backpedalling on their Xbox One rubbish before its release) so keep voting with your voice and your wallet if you want to effect positive change.

Even Nintendo has realised they need to listen more. I’m hopeful for them in the future, now that they’ve admitted they need to do things differently.

The industry can’t fail outright – people WANT to play games. Where there is demand, there will be supply.

So WTF ware they thinking at Oculus, when they soled out there Kickstart backers!

And i am thinking not the only one!

Tom

They didn’t sell out on the Kickstarters, technically. That project was for producing a dev kit for VR research and that’s exactly what they did and delivered.

So, technically, they didn’t sell them out. Morally/ethically, though… I don’t know. I would be annoyed, as a backer. I wasn’t (couldn’t afford at the time) but I WAS super excited for the Dev Kit 2 and the eventual retail release, so I’m still pretty disappointed.

Dozerman

Wow. That video is incredibly disturbing to me as a nerd.

sketchbag

Hahaha. Idiocracy here we come. That video is bonkers. I would probably go on an ad-filled rampage with grenade launchers to every company’s whose ads appeared during it. Some kind of neverending insanity loop. I dont think there are enough grenades. Unless….a grenade manufacturer sponsored me.

http://www.classicdosgames.com DOSGuy

They were thinking “2 billion dollars!” and danced all the way to the bank.

Phobos

What a nightmare of a video, to think we are heading that way.

havor

No, i don’t think it will ever be that extreme, but a way toned down version of it, is what FB has in mind i think.

Jai Guru

Yes well you’ve hit the nail on the head as to why this is legitimately bad news. Screw all these dorks with an over attachment to a profoundly frivolous hobby. The market implications of backers feeling they’v ebeen sold out is plain dangerous. Crowd Sourcing is one of the only ways for small media businesses to even hope to compete on the same stage as multinational publishers. If the actions of Rift’s original owners causes the public to lose faith in Kickstarter, that’s it. Crowd sourcing as a whole will die with it.

Robert

Wow, the Sony Project Morpheus just got a lot more promising

Tom

Yeah, hope it works on PC too though. I also hope there’s some kind of standard which allows all these kits to be compatible with different software otherwise this is going to turn into a right clusterfuck.

Mirimon

exactly.. they NEED to establish a standard first, to create the market, competition can come later.

eonvee375

agreed, though im still hoping Valve will take the wheel first

castAR fan

not sure id want a Morpheus sony rootkit in my future AR/VR gear

Paul Stevens

for me it wasnt all bad until i saw this little bit on engadget

“Zuckerberg called out virtual reality as one of the computing platforms of the future — following desktops and mobile — and
yes, talked about building Facebook’s advertising into it.
Specifically, he talked about the potential of a virtual communication
network, buying virtual goods, and down the line, advertising.”

building facebooks advertising into it….
…..urgh

AdamRadzik22

I had to triple confirm this news on three separate sites yesterday before I believed it. I felt kind of betrayed. Not that I was one of their kickstarter backers, but I haven’t had this much passion for an electronic device (especially one that didn’t even exist!) since I was a kid and got the Nintendo. It just had a hold of the hopeful, optimistic part of me. I saw the potential gaming future, yes, but also all the other things that we all agree could be a part of it. Walking on the moon, being in a concert, watching a football game front row, watching movies, and a million other possibilities of the headset. However, that was always grounded by knowing that third party companies could just expand on what Oculus had developed and built. There was no direct conflict between what potential third party developers came up with, and the intent and vision that Oculus had.

Now, however, the ownership of Facebook changes nearly everything. It completely decimates any personal feeling I had towards the Rift, and it dooms the openness of what the Rift *could* become. There’s no way that there is a sustained movement of open access and development for the Rift now, not in the long run.

Every single company that has ever bought any other company has always said the lip service about how “nothing changes in the day to day”. And of course, nothing changes in any short term. But also, no company buys another company for billions of dollars without expecting an eventual profit, or without plans to monetize in the mid to long term future in a way that will benefit that single parent company. And this will be no exception.

Tom

> “I felt kind of betrayed. Not that I was one of their kickstarter backers, but I haven’t had this much passion for an electronic device (especially one that didn’t even exist!) since I was a kid and got the Nintendo.”

Well said, I agree completely. I feel like I’ve been robbed, I was really looking forward to the future of the Oculus (and me having one) and it’s been on my mind a lot lately, and now this crap.

pelov lov

From a business perspective, the acquisition makes sense. Although that’s a lot of cash, Oculus is perhaps seen as the pioneer when it comes to VR. And coupled with Zuckerberg’s comments about this opening up tremendous potential for ads, product placement, and social networking the $2bn acquisition makes financial sense for Facebook. This could expand their business model and attract a lot of eager marketing type folks.

But for the enthusiast gamer this is the worst news in recent memory, and Zuckerberg’s comments since the acquisition have only put a nail in the coffin for their hopes of Oculus VR spearheading a new era in gaming and an interaction free of prying eyes.

You’re absolutely correct regarding the damage to their reputation as well. Even if Zuckerberg were to come out and take back what he’s said and instead state that Facebook will provide financial support but otherwise play a hands-off approach, the trust has already been breached and the PR damage has already been done.

Suckerberg Mark

Great article. Since the 286 was a hot ticket, lol!

Dozerman

What… the… fuck…

Jeff Vahrenkamp

This news is like learning your best friend just got engaged to the really bitchy girl that you hate… All I can think is “what is going on?”

http://www.classicdosgames.com DOSGuy

I hesitate to mention it, but it seems like one of the most anticipated uses for Occulus Rift has just died. People were definitely looking forward to playing immersive 3D games, watching 3D movies, and taking virtual tours of real and fictional places, and most of those things are likely to survive the Facebook acquisition. The odds are good that Facebook is going to take away the open application environment we were all hoping for and instead force all Oculus Rift software to be purchased through an App Store that they will get a cut from, and block any software that they don’t want Facebook to be associated with, so immersive 3D porn is the first casualty. Now you’re going to have jailbreak your Oculus Rift to see 3D boobies.

Travis Frazier

OR is a peripheral, What you are suggesting is like saying your monitor has the ability to block you from looking at porn. That’s not how this technology works.

http://www.classicdosgames.com DOSGuy

OR isn’t a shipping product yet. There’s still time to add hardware or firmware to lock the device into only displaying content that has been purchased from an Oculus Rift App Store. After a $2 billion acquisition, I guarantee they’re exploring every option to monetize every aspect of this product. It would be a colossal missed opportunity not to lock the device to a Facebook-owned app store.

Any peripheral (including monitors) can be locked however the manufucturer wants. Dell could choose to make monitors that only work if they receive a key from Dell-licensed software, but people would just buy their monitor from someone else. If you don’t want to be locked into the Oculus Rift App Store, what are you going to buy instead?

Travis Frazier

You mean besides Sony’s VR headgear?

But still they can’t just include an app store for a monitor. You would basically have to turn that monitor into a computer to manage that, and at that point why wouldn’t they just sale it as a computer?

You can’t lock out peripherals like that and frankly its crazy you think that anybody would even try it. And even if they managed to completely reinvent the OR so that it was a wearable computer like that it would be hacked so fast it would make your head spin. If a driver allows it to connect to a PC then there is no way you can stop users from using your peripheral as they see fit.

http://www.classicdosgames.com DOSGuy

Yes, like Sony’s Morpheus that only works with the PS4 (I think).

And no, you don’t have to turn a monitor into a computer to lock it to an App Store. Way back in 1983, Nintendo built the Famicom/NES to only work with cartridges that contained the 10NES lockout chip so that they could get licensing fees from every cartridge sold for their system. Nowadays most devices have flashable firmware chips that can include code to support or block anything they want. Every monitor already has chips in it. In these days of multi-billion transistor chips, the cost of devoting a few of those transistors to checking for a DRM key is a drop in the bucket. It is absolutely trivial to make a peripheral that only works if it receives a valid encrypted key.

Of course, every DRM system ever invented has been cracked. The Oculus Rift DRM would be broken within days, maybe hours! That hasn’t stopped Apple from locking their devices to their App Store. As with iPhones, Blu-ray players, Xboxes and everything else, most people won’t choose to jailbreak their Oculus Rift. As long as less than 100% of customers do it, Facebook gets a cut of every piece of software the non-jailbreakers buy. This really is device 101 in the 21st century. From phones to video game consoles to Windows 8’s Metro/Modern UI platform, everyone is trying to lock their devices/operating systems to their App Store in order to take a cut of software sales. The Oculus Rift held the promise of being an open platform created through crowdsourcing. Now it holds the spectre of being yet another closed platform controlled by a megacorporation that will monetize every aspect of it that they can.

Travis Frazier

“Way back in 1983, Nintendo built the Famicom/NES to only work…”

I’m going to stop you there. That’s a different COMPUTER. That type of lockout only works if the system is doing the lock out which means that Oculus and facebook would have to convince Microsoft or (even harder) the hardware manufactures to enforce such a lock out. If a peripheral is compatible with PC then it is IMPOSSIBLE to carry out such a thing.

“Every monitor already has chips in it. In these days of multi-billion transistor chips, the cost of devoting a few of those transistors to checking for a DRM key is a drop in the bucket.”

Maybe if you want your key to be cracked within seconds so that all software could just send your key and bypass your security. People wouldn’t even have to jailbreak there stuff. Not to mention that current ports don’t have that ability.

http://www.classicdosgames.com DOSGuy

“If a peripheral is compatible with PC then it is IMPOSSIBLE to carry out such a thing. … Not to mention that current ports don’t have that ability.”

Wow. I… wow. No. I don’t even know if I can explain how wrong those statements are.

Let’s say the Oculus Rift connects to your computer using USB. In order for the OR to work, it has to receive an encrypted key. USB is a digital interface that can send any data it wants, and that data can be interpreted by the device however it wants. The same is true if the OR connects by HDMI. HDMI was designed to allow TVs to block HD DVDs and Blu-rays if they didn’t send a valid HDCP key. That’s why they don’t display in full HD if you connect using composite or component cables. Analog signalling formats are harder to force DRM over, but digital interfaces can send any data in any format, and the connected device can be programmed to require data in a specific format, the inclusion of specific header data, or refuse to turn on until a certain key has been sent.

As you say, it would be cracked. The crack could involve software that captures communications between the device and the driver software, or a dongle that the OR would connect to before connecting to the USB port, or a mod chip that you solder onto the OR’s PCB. Hell yeah the DRM will be cracked, but the existence of a crack doesn’t guarantee that everyone will use it. Nintendo was mostly successful in preventing unlicensed software on their platform in 1983, and locking devices to specific software has gotten much more sophisticated, easier and cheaper in the 30 years since then. Facebook has a lot of resources to develop DRM and pursue legal action against those who attempt to circumvent it. In the end, many people don’t know about the existence of jailbreaks and DRM hacks, and many of those who do choose not to use them anyway.

Travis Frazier

“HDMI was designed to allow TVs”

ANNND Its you NES argument all over again. TV isn’t a peripheral buddy, Call me when you learn the difference.

“Facebook has a lot of resources to develop DRM and pursue legal action against those who attempt to circumvent it.”

No they wouldn’t. The laws clearly state that you can do whatever you want with hardware. This is why jailbreaking isn’t against the law not to mention they couldn’t track it is the device isn’t an internet device.

David Tremblay

It’s Palmer Luckey … not Parker

Joel Hruska

Thank you. Fixing that.

Basil Nolan

Like your favorite aptitude package turned into an msi installer.

Eric

I’m kind of on the fence, but I can’t really think of too many other tech companies that would be worse in terms of taking ownership of Oculus. I would have expected maybe MS to pull the trigger on them to counter Sony’s efforts, but again they don’t seem to make any “smart” business decisions anymore so that was never going to happen. Hopefully, they will be able to get additional resources and at least churn out at least 1x consumer product before turning this into something other than what was originally intended for the Rift. From there, maybe another player comes into the picture… maybe Razer or Nvidia and we still get what we wanted in the end? Crossing fingers and toes on that front….

Mirimon

sigh, but it’s just a tv on your head….it really won’t be much different from looking at your current monitor, the only difference is the degree of immersion.

Joel Hruska

The immersion boost is amazing. I’m a giant fan of the Rift. Or was.

Mirimon

my feeling as well.. hopefully FB is simply a financial stepping stone and nothing more… but atm this is starting to make even Sony’s Morpheus look much more appealing (perhaps they will broaden the application market to not just it’s console?)

David Onter

Try it.

Mirimon

did, several times through it’s build, and the latest one at GDC this year in cali…

P.S. I have a really great idea, I simply don’t over-hype it, and having extensively used VR systems in the military for a long time now (though lacking in graphics, and consumer friendly size, they do the job well enough to allow you to understand the scope of game format and degree of immersion they are limited to.

Phobos

Exactly, its way overhyped.

Dunbar

I tried the DK back in the summer, it was laggy and low resolution; but, it was still f*cking amazing. It’s been a long time since an old man like me has been genuinely excited about anything. This technology is revolutionary, even if Zuckerbuns fumbles the birth.

Phobos

R.I.P Oculus.

http://about.me/redgrave Redgrave

The irony is that Facebook bought Oculus with the money he made because of us, its users. Talk about unwanted gifts. I’m confused if it’s right to be ungrateful or not in this situation.

Mirimon

with Stocks, not actual money..

Travis Frazier

And actual money

Mirimon

meh, only $400 mil of that is cash.. a pittance.. and they may want to hold onto that… just in case.

Travis Frazier

nearly a 4th isn’t “a pittance”

Mirimon

2 bil is a pittance as a whole.. MSFT loses that annually just on xbox operations… (not including cost of R&D, marketing, and repair/replacement under warranty)…has been, for the better half of a decade.., 2bil in this industry is a pittance..

Travis Frazier

The most expensive game ever made was GTA V which cost R* $265 Million. if you think 2 billion is a pittance then you have much to learn about the industery

Mirimon

did you not read above…..

and cost of 265 mil on a game that took in, and is still taking in…over $1,949,675,000 in less than 6 months, and on a limited platform market……not including microtransactions etc…. fyi.. in less than 6 months they made more than 7 times what they put in….

but that is a single title.. not a display platform, which would cater many more titles and applications. These is the type of tech that would not only be good in gaming, but allow a surgeon to practice his skill, it’s the type of thing that would enhance remote operations of machinery (space programs, defense systems, etc have been looking into it very deeply…)… VR is arguably a vast field with a robust market potential.

I’ve been in the gaming/electronics industry for over 31 years… 2 bil IS a pittance….. most likely it will be spent poorly, like a once famous career sports participant, and the majority will be owed in taxes and legal fees down the road.

Travis Frazier

“less than 6 months they made more than 7 times what they put in”

HAHA no. You have no idea how that money gets split up. That was just to make the game not counting everything else like marketing. After being divided up the publisher doesn’t make anywhere close that amount.

And that’s not just any game. That’s one of the BIGGEST games. Bioshock sold MILLIONS of copies yet was considered a failure. Their studio was shut down over a “pittance”

“but that is a single title.. not a display platform,”

Rift isn’t a platform. Its a peripheral.

“VR is arguably a vast field with a robust market potential.”

Yes which is why Facebook paid a huge amount of money for it =)

“I’ve been in the gaming/electronics industry for over 31 years”

What’s with people trying to get into D*** measuring contests with me today. I don’t care what you claim your job is. If you have to resort to trying to argue from authority then you have already lost the debate.

Mirimon

GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEAD..
VR is a DISPLAY PLATFORM… I did not say anything about being an independent gaming platform, it is nothing more than TV on your head. go ahead, take 3 monitors and place them surrounding your face, now move the camera around THAT is VR… the camera is controlled now with your head, not your hand, the angles of view are just the same, all that is done here is taking that and making it more portable (which allows for more immersive motion control integration.

recap,
Pittance
what VR is.

now, you may want to settle down and think about things for a bit, or perhaps spend some time in the industry and with these tools before commenting on it like the fool you have been. And by all means, please feel free to respond with w/e childish sentiment you feel adequately vindicates your obvious obsession with genital inequality.

Travis Frazier

“GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEAD..
VR is a DISPLAY PLATFORM”

Nope. VR is a display peripheral.

” I did not say anything about being an independent gaming platform,”

So you admit that your compresion of MSFT xbox division is stupid then? Good.

“it is nothing more than TV”

Which is why its a PERIPHERAL. Not a platform.

“now, you may want to settle down and think about things for a bit, or perhaps spend some time in the industry and with these tools before commenting on it like the fool you have been.”

Ahh And more d*** measuring. Notice how you didn’t even present any actual arguments there? Thats what happens when you try to argue from authority. Your argument now is “I’m in this industry which means I’m better than you and I’m right” aka d*** measuring. If you still don’t understand the term then look it up on urban dictionary. It’s a pretty simple term.

“your obvious obsession with genital inequality.”

Your the one that’s trying to over compensate for your lack of an argument =)

im all for the freedom of the interwebs but there really does need to be some regulation put in place, im not a facebook user but a high percentage of the Zombie populous are. the silly flash based rip off (columns lol) flash based games are wrong on so so many levels, the even advertising candy cringe or what ever its called on Childrens tv channels encouraging them to pay money and receive virtual items in return on yet other games (which are not games in my opinion), and yet even if someone does not have the micro cash to get ahead and quench their addiction they are encouraged to give out personal details to scam sites or download malware/adware to their computers in return for virtual items, or spam their friends list with yet advertisements of the games the get them to play like an email scam? how facebook gets away with this, and the companies like zynga who then put those same games on android and IOS is beyond me.. i can see the future hoards of what once where humans all sat fitting with oculus masks on, the only change is that the new face branded masks have a credit card pdq slapped on the side for the micropayments…

i hate facebook for many reasons, it should just be called paedo’swelcometomykids.com.. social networking should be banned kids should not be allowed on it period, facebook is just a dating website for single people, Cheating housewives, and wierdo’s with no life, sorry thats just my opinion :-)

Joel Hruska

Well, seeing as the damn thing has more than a billion users, that’s an awful lot of “weirdos with no lives.’ You know why I started using it? Because FB and Twitter now drive a lot of business conversation, too.

If you aren’t on Facebook, you aren’t interacting with readers or companies where they are most likely to be.

Mirimon

lets not forget, a good portion of the “population” of FB is comprised of companies, organizations, portrayed characters, alternate personalities, completely fictional people, etc etc.

Some would argue that WoW has a large population still, many who played it would argue that even at it’s peak, a large chuck of that population were merely gold farmers….from some regional, large country (you know the one I am talking about…)

gameoholic007

Well, all eye’s are on you Sony, make it happen!

saintkamus

Oculus rift fans just proved there is such a thing as technological hipsters. The Facebook acquisition means that VR now have a chance at becoming mainstream, which is fantastic news. But they are not “cool” anymore because they sold out…

There are some valid concerns out there though, but if oculus delivers on their promises, I fail to see how this is a bad thing. They now have the potential to invest on VR more money than Sony ever would, on something that is as unproven as VR.

For the first time, I think that oculus has a shot of actually delivering a product worthy of the hype. They can now afford to actually develop input controllers to go along with the fist consumer version, which was a huge concern before this announcement, and now they can deliver a product so well put together that it can rival sony’s sleek design.

VR just got real. And chances are, we will even get a custom screen designed for VR, instead of a screen designed for phones with tons of compromises.

Dunbar

The fear is Oculus will simply become a polished Facebook peripheral, with gaming tacked on as bait.

A million years ago I was forced into the Steam ecosystem in order to play Counterstrike; sure it was just a patch delivery system back then, but it represented a loss of user control; and my fears were justified. Steam has since developed into a gaming dystopia, imho.

Facebook will licence the tech behind Oculus to other companies, I’m sure many iteration on the theme will proliferate, but Facebook now holds the keys to the kingdom. I pray they don’t integrate Facebook into Oculus, making a FB account part of the registration process; or something equally sinister.

saintkamus

You don’t have to use steam to buy most games… But I would personally “suffer” the inconveniences of steam in order to get my games online.
Also, you have to realize that market for VR simply doesn’t exist yet. And oculus has a much higher chance of making VR an actual thing now that they have more ample resources for making it happen.
Now they can afford to advertise heavily and actually make a product that isn’t terrible. (I still think VR won’t be super-cool until we can walk around and have much, much higher resolution screens, but I thin they can now make something that’s just good enough to lure people into VR)

So really, who cares that it was apple that made smartphones and tablets a commercial success? They opened the floodgates, and the competition is everywhere. This is what we need for VR.
Who cares if Facebook eventually tries to make their social application (that people might even like…) once the market is there. There should be plenty of options to choose from. A high end VR headset could cost as little as 100 dollars in just 3 to 5 years.

And now that oculus can actually sell the hardware at cost (let’s say $200-250) a lot more people will be able to afford to get into VR even as early adopters, which is very unusual for new technologies. Sure, it’s not as good as their plan they mentioned a whole back about making the oculus rift free, but it would be a huge step in that direction.

Joel Hruska

This has nothing to do with hipsterism and everything to do with people not *trusting* Facebook to deliver the product that people wanted.

I don’t want a social VR experience. I don’t want to see Oculus ruined by the same people who claimed that 3D movies and TV were going to be the new hotness when it was obvious, from the beginning, that this would never happen.

saintkamus

I don’t think there is anything to worry about for the next few years. Oculus will be left alone for a while. And when VR becomes something people use on a daily basis, then Facebook will make its play, but not a moment sooner in my opinion.
But like I said, by then the VR market will be flooded with competitors.
So, if oculus is somehow ruined by them there will be plenty of choices…. But I suspect this won’t be the case, Facebook would try to do what it always has, and be on every platform they can. This is I think a play to get VR off the ground, and then get into it when everyone is on board. Just like they did on smartphones.

Stacey Bright

I see a huge disconnect with Zukerberg’s ‘vision’, and reality. Its a stretch at this point to honestly believe you can market a VR headset to the masses, leveraging it on social media. I certainly love the idea of the Rift as much as the next geek/gamer, but look at it for what it is. It had a target demographic, that was fully onboard, niche market or not. Now the involvement with FB has caused a huge decline in consumer faith in the core, while gambling on selling it to larger less technology interested/aware crowd. People who at large only even have a smart phone, because its “uncool” to be using anything else, or only even use Facebook itself for the same reason. They have zero clue about the many capabilities of what they probably spent too much money on, and probably don’t care to. Zukerberg wants to convince them that a head mounted personal display is in someway “cool”.

saintkamus

But that’s exactly the argument I was making, VR IS cool. If you try it you instantly become a believer.
The technology is ready for prime time after decades of promises. The only problem was, that it was only a niche. And now it has the potential to go mainstream. Facebook isn’t looking to get into VR at all for a few years, maybe even more then that. But they are masking a play to get it off the ground and on people’s minds.
And when VR becomes huge (and I’m sure it will) they’ll make their move.

Stacey Bright

That’s where you miss my point. VR is cool, to us. The particular kind of people that happen frequent a site called ExtremeTech. We are that target group that VR would sell to, and sadly we are not the majority. Everything about a HMD is immediately unattractive to EVERYONE else. In order to try it you’d have to buy it, and we are the most immediate people that would. Not only does the Rift not have a market outside the niche group, that group is probably currently halved due to the FB involvement. If the promise is upheld of it being focused on gaming first, then what draws the non gamers to it. Heck I have a friend, who’s a gamer, that described my hat with a reflective clip for TrackIR as ‘goofy looking’. And its completely non-intrusive and highly functional for its purpose. The Rift would probably need a friggin Apple logo to become huge.

Fumes Inkorporated

Blah, VR was real before, look at how much investment money the Rift was already getting on top of the kickstarter. Furthermore if they just wanted money they could have A: asked for it or B: starting looking around for a half decent company to fund them. Remember Palmar said they would not seek Corporate funding during the kickstarter.

Facebook is a vehicle for advertising and selling people’s data. Other than money they dont bring anything to the table.

Just tossing out the term hipster is irrelevant. I guess your a hipster. Just cause.

saintkamus

Just read out loud what you just typed. They HAD already “sold out” long before the Facebook deal!
What this means is that those investors no longer have a say in the future of the company, and that’s great. And who gives a damn about Facebook making money selling people’s data?

The point is, oculus has much more freedom then it did before the acquisition, since they no longer have to answer to the board of directors that were looking for a quick return on their investment. Facebook is in it for the long haul, and that’s great news for the team at oculus. I’m pretty damn sure that their promises will be much easier to keep now that they have a lot more resources to deliver on those promises.

Here is what people don’t seem to get… Facebook was getting into VR anyway, they try to deliver their services on multiple platforms, you can bet that if they write an application for VR, it will run on every major VR platform, of course, including their own. So that wouldn’t have changed anyway.

People seem to be missing what this is about:

This is about making VR an actual thing, not just a niche product that might or might not end up being popular. I think VR was going to be popular regardless, but this will sped the process up quite a bit.

Guest

This

Boxelman

Oculus Rift = Great way to strap advertisements to you face!

Bruce B.

Thanks for the tip. I will not be getting into VR for now. And no, I did not sign in with Facebook to post this, either! :)

Ben D M

I’m not really sure how any of the parties involved believe things will continue on ‘as normal’, the people who made it what it is today are no longer interested. The developer base is going to drastically different going forward and it is painfully naive of OR to think otherwise.

The whole thing sucks.

@SarcasticSloth

Leave it to a company headed by a feminist jew to destroy the one technology that would have enabled waifuism to become a thing in the west.

Mirimon

feminism: acting contrary to the sexual organization set in place by Nature hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of years ago.

John Kilborn

Very well stated. It’s not 100% certain that Facebook will start Virtual Reality off on the wrong foot. But it is hard to imagine that they won’t use this for further immersion into their version of social networking. In other words, not what the people buying Oculus wanted. I wouldn’t be surprised if the games being developed for Oculus right now end up secondary to a virtual Facebook experience.

dubstep

What is Facebook’s business model? “Sell user data. Make money from ads.”

Can you think of any positives from other acquisitions? Usually, when a big company buys a smaller company, they take the things they want, incorporate them into their business model, and scrap the rest.

Facebook isn’t “For gamers, by gamers.” I don’t see them continuing on with the gamer idea after the headset gets the tech worked out. More likely they’ll replace the OR team with Facebook programmers to turn it into the ad filled data mining device they want. Assuming they can get the general masses to purchase it in enough quantity to turn a profit.

Guest

Wasn’t about to strap any sort of contraption to my face anyhow, lol….NSA might hack it and control my thoughts.

People need tin foil hats, I swear…

Jai Guru

All of this is more or less irrelevant now. I’ve said the Rift was DOA and that was before Facebook’s acquisition.

Now that Facebook does own it, Sony has been free to move on with their vr headset which is a profoundly stupid move. The real problem with the rift, and the problem with project morpheus, is that you cannot simply plug the software to support these devices into preexisting games. The titles have to be build around them. In an age where development costs literally put whole studios out of business, there is just NOTHING attractive about VR headsets to devs or publishers. Now that there’s TWO, it’s even worse. So are devs supposed to support BOTH devices, requiring still that much more dev cycle and testing for cross platform titles?

This acquisition killed both devices. It’s a novel idea, but the market could not support it even before this.

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2016 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.